kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Pay per bit solves all
said by TKJunkMail  :The solution that should be implemented to address all bandwidth hog issues - a pay per bit pricing model. With that model, those who consume the most bandwidth pay the most money. This does 2 things: It puts the burden of upgrading infrastructure on those causing the need for an upgrade. And it puts a self-limit on those biggest bandwidth hogs - how much are they willing to pay to consume huge amounts of bandwidth. At some point they will cut their usage to match their available funds. Uh, not again... you and your corporate shill PR points... no, we are not going to give you, cable shills the option to charge EVEN MORE when you cannot deliver anything better than the 14-15th place on the world list - we are already paying more than the top3. |
|
Myhrddin
join:2003-12-12
Beaumont, TX
| reply to TKJunkMail
Pay per bit.. Are you Bill Gates.?
This mess needs to be stopped before they're deciding what websites you can have and on what tier of service. I'm sorry, that site isn't available with standard expanded internet.
Would you like to Biggie Size that.? |
|
tsu9
join:2001-08-17
Wheeling, IL | reply to TKJunkMail
Honestly TK, if "bandwitch hogs" are draining that much money, the ISPs are doing something seriously, grossly, negligent. |
|
sjr
join:2006-08-27
Osseo, MN
| reply to TKJunkMail
That sounds exactly like traditional landline pricing for long distance service of old. But cell phones and now voip are largely killing off that pricing model. Why would one go back to it for something else?
If one was to price that way are the isp's going to guarantee that you will not get things like spam with attachment of large files and for that matter are the isp's not going to send their own buy more of our stuff emails with lots of images and such in them? I certainly don't want to pay for crap I don't want or didn't request to get. I already don't use Comcast's portal page and I sure wouldn't with all the crap they have going on there if I was paying by the byte.
The only way I could see that plan working anywhere in the customers favor is if you start at a bandwidth amount for the month then go per byte rate when you go over that amount. But it needs to start at some reasonable number like 100gb/month. |
|
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| reply to TKJunkMail
Per bit pricing was done away with years ago. The problem isn't bandwidth saturation, which last I heard hasn't nearly tapped the potential of all that dark fiber yet. The problem is these companies want more money. They want that money from other companies that have very successful online business models. They are envious because other companies found a way to make a lot of money while they are still placating to stockholders and playing with their own budget numbers.
The solution is for the incumbent telcos and cablecos to simply shut up. If they want more revenue they need to work on a revenue stream that actually offers their customers something more instead of restricting customers of what they currently enjoy. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
|  reply to tsu9
The solution that should be implemented to address all bandwidth hog issues - a pay per bit pricing model. With that model, those who consume the most bandwidth pay the most money. This does 2 things:
It puts the burden of upgrading infrastructure on those causing the need for an upgrade. And it puts a self-limit on those biggest bandwidth hogs - how much are they willing to pay to consume huge amounts of bandwidth. At some point they will cut their usage to match their available funds.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page |
|
